It's remarkable how agitated people can become when they think you are criticising their favourite product while at the same time completely failing to understand the underlying point that is drawing the criticism.
The design feature in Tank-Ace's quote is questionable in my opinion because it relies on a rigourous procedure to be followed by the operator and unfortunately human beings are demonstrably poor at doing so. Despite all the superfluous comments to dismiss this point I think you / we all accept this potential failing in the man / machine relationship instinctively, since I have no doubt you all point the weapon in a safe direction when dry firing.
I'm actually not a huge fan of Glock in particular, or pistols in general. Good for PDW's and security, but to me guns are
primarily for hunting, which is why I perfer long-arms. That and any long-arm works as well as or better than a pistol for things like home-defense (12ga is more intimidating than a 9mm). And if the appocalypse comes, I'd rather deal with the crazies at a couple hundred yards with the 30-06, rather than let them get close and deal with them with the pistol.
Plus rifle-caliber rounds pack more stopping power.
But regardless, the reason the man was shot isn't because he had to follow a complex or tedious procedure, but because he failed to check to see if it was safe, which is something you should do before
grabbing a firearm, yet alone disassembling one.
I mean blaming Glock is like blaming the PDU when some dumb-arse gets electrocuted rewiring a switch because he didn't kill the power at the circut breaker first. "You provided power to his home; how dare you!"